A generational test

 A Boomer doesn’t understand why his g-g-generation is held in such open contempt by the younger generations:

I’m not sure I understand. As a 69-year old boomer, I don’t know any boomer of my acquaintance who wouldn’t, and hasn’t, tried to help his children and grandchildren in any way he can, whether with time or money, or any other way.

Very well. I think we can solve this conundrum. Ask yourself these four questions, Boomer:

  1. On average, how many days per year did you see your grandparents as a child?
  2. How many days per year do you see your grandchildren?
  3. What did you inherit from your father and grandfather?
  4. In real terms, do you expect to leave more to each and every child and grandchild than you received, or less.
Of course there will be outliers, so keep in mind that general attitudes are usually derived from relative averages. I wonder what the over/under on “but… but.. times were different and I don’t even live in the same state as my grandkids” will be?
In light of the usual responses from Boomers about this subject being inspired by personal issues and projecting their own historic hostility for their parents and everyone else over thirty onto me, I should like to take this opportunity to point out that my parents are not Boomers and neither am I.

UPDATE: Boomers are so wicked and stupid that some of them are even trying to claim that Generation X was the “Me Generation”. From Wikipedia:
The “Me” generation is a term referring to Baby Boomers in the United States and the self-involved qualities that some people associate with it. The 1970s were dubbed the “Me decade” by writer Tom Wolfe; Christopher Lasch was another writer who commented on the rise of a culture of narcissism among the younger generation of that era. The phrase caught on with the general public, at a time when “self-realization” and “self-fulfillment” were becoming cultural aspirations to which young people supposedly ascribed higher importance than social responsibility.

They want you weak, small, and stupid

Now, only a complete madman – or more likely, madwoman – would voluntarily forgo eating meat in the first place, but it is downright evil to deny growing children the sustenance necessary for their full development. If a plant-based diet is inhibiting their height to this extent, imagine how much it is inhibiting their intellectual capacity.

Vegans cut out all animal products, including dairy, eggs and even honey. But there is little evidence on the potential damage this does to children’s health.

Lead author Professor Jonathan Wells, from UCL, said: ‘We know that people are increasingly being drawn to plant-based diets for several reasons, including promoting animal welfare and reducing our impact on the climate. 

‘Indeed, a global shift towards plant-based diets is now recognised to be crucial for preventing climate breakdown, and we strongly support this effort.

‘We also know that until now research into the health impact of these diets on children has been largely limited to assessments of height and weight and conducted only in vegetarian children. 

‘Our study provides a substantial insight into the health outcomes in children following vegetarian and vegan diets.’

The new study looked at 187 healthy five to ten-year-olds in Poland. Of these, 63 children were vegetarians, 52 vegans and 72 omnivores.

Children on vegan diets were on average three centimetres shorter. They also had four to six per cent lower bone mineral content and were more than three times more likely to be deficient in vitamin B-12 than omnivores.

For lunch today, I’ll be having pepper sausage and bufalo mozzerella, washed down by a good Spanish tempranillo. Just in case….

They KNOW they’re hypocrites

In which Twitter demonstrates the complete futility of the conservative “owning the libs” strategy:

Twitter declared access to its platform a ‘human right’ on Saturday, prompting conservatives to accuse the firm of hypocrisy after it banned former President Donald Trump and others for violating its terms of service.
The social media giant’s statement came as a response to Nigeria’s decision to ban Twitter over the deletion of a tweet from Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari that was seen as threatening separatist movements.
‘We are deeply concerned by the blocking of Twitter in Nigeria. Access to the free and #OpenInternet is an essential human right in modern society,’ the company said in a statement.

What, pray tell, is the point of trying to prove, for the Nth time, that the Left is hypocritical when they have been openly and shamelessly trumpeting their right to impose double standards since before they were known as “the Left”? If they didn’t have double standards, they wouldn’t have any standards at all.

Mailvox: in defense of despair

A Boomer writes to explain why it’s better not to hope, and why the right thing to do is to sit around waiting for others to get the job done before you get involved:

Except politics isn’t a soccer game where organized players supported by infrastructure and committed to achieving a goal can be expected to take the initiative in those fleeting moments that could make a difference. Real politics is low intensity warfare where people lose family, careers, freedom, health and life. 

The blightwing and its dissident fringe is comprised of impoverished/cheap, unorganized, indolent cowards “led” by grifters. They look for someone else to do the heavy lifting as they observe from afar, doing handsprings in skirts, chanting silly cheers. It has been that way for 57+ years.

When I see the blightwing organized locally, regionally, and nationally, destroying the enemy, taking casualties and caring for their own, taking the initiative, always working and raising the ante – then and only then will I resume active participation on the ground, where it counts.

Of course by then, no one who has been active locally, regionally, and nationally will have any use for his useless, oversized Boomer butt. 

I’m not saying anyone should vote harder, or place any trust in Con Inc. or in the Republican Party. I’m also not saying that anyone should blithely proceed in the blind confidence that Donald Trump is flawlessly executing Q’s 12-D underwater chess strategy. 

But only the weak of mind and character fear to hope, and prefer indolence and despair to inspiration and determination.

Play the miss

Forget despair. I’m not talking about that. Everyone understands that despair is worse than useless. What I’m talking about is a refusal to hope, which is entirely different. And the problem with a refusal to hope is this: you will not be in a position to act or take advantage of the situation in the event that things happen to break your way.

I’ve played soccer for a long time. Although it’s been literal decades since I was a goal-a-game striker, I still score more often than I’m usually expected to, both in practice and in games, mostly due to my decades of experience in front of goal. And what primarily distinguishes the sort of scorer known as a fox-in-the-box is a form of anticipation.
The less experienced striker will always focus on the defender’s actions. And when he’s at a proximity disadvantage, he assumes that the defender, or the keeper, is going to succeed whatever it is that he intends to do. So, the striker slows down if he sees he can’t get there in time to contest the ball, or if he’s more aggressive, he moves toward where he expects the defender to move the ball or to block off a passing lane.
You can often identify a dangerous scorer when a striker looks as if he’s lazy, or perhaps even a little bit retarded. As the defender clears the ball, he runs right past, looking almost as if he doesn’t know what just happened. When the goalie leaps in the air to grab a high ball, he doesn’t jump, or even try to get in the goalie’s way. When his teammate shoots on goal, he doesn’t run toward the action, but diagonally, away from the action and outside the posts.
It often looks clueless, but what the striker is actually doing is assuming that the other player is going to make a mistake and he is acting as if the other player isn’t even there. If the defender misses or mishits the ball, the striker will run right onto it. If the goalie misjudges the height of the ball, the striker will have the ball in front of an empty net. If the shot is deflected, the striker will be in a position to get the rebound and possibly an easy shot on a wide-open net.
About seven years ago, I scored the goal that won the league championship for my team when a midfielder fired a fast diagonal pass on the ground toward the right corner of the 18-yard box. There wasn’t much time left and the grass was wet, so instead of cutting left inside the last defender, which would have allowed me to have the first crack at the ball at the cost of a difficult first touch that would also bring me closer to the other defenders, I just ran toward where the ball would be if the defender didn’t manage to block it and hoped that he would miss it, knowing that the wet grass was going to make the ball slide faster than normal. He slid to intercept it, as I knew he would, but he didn’t quite manage to get a foot on the ball, (or on me, since I jumped as he slid to avoid getting taken out) which left me one-on-one with the goalie. The goalie was already coming out and moving to right, so I simply hit a low shot to the left with my first touch. Goal. Game. Championship.
When you don’t play the miss, you’re usually not in a position to take advantage of it when it happens. This is why you should always utilize hopium rather than deride it, even though you know perfectly well how low the percentages are. Because even if the percentages of a miss are low, the percentages of scoring when there is a miss are very, very high.

Mailvox: You just don’t get it

Don’t you see? Don’t you get it? Matt and Benny totally OWNED THE LIBS!

The number of people reacting here who think they were giving money to the enemy to help the enemy’s grandmother is ridiculous.
No one who saw the stunt unfold would think that. It was a slight against AOC and the fact that she hadn’t helped her own grandmother. It also highlighted how regular Americans could solve a problem without government intervention.
In addition to this, no money was given to AOC’s family.
Anyone who followed the stunt realized AOC was never going to accept the funds. It was a stunt to make AOC look bad, and it was more effective by far than anything most of us have done.

At this point, I no longer feel any sympathy for all the idiots who read and support The Daily Wire. They’re simply too stupid to be able to distinguish between predator and prey.

The point, morons, is that no one on the planet, beginning with AOC, gives a quantum of a damn whether AOC helps her grandmother or not. Boomers don’t even help their own children or grandchildren, Generation X is gleefully awaiting The Day of the Pillow, the Millennials are bitter that neither their parents nor their grandparents will help them with their young children, and the Zoomers are either a) trying to figure out if they are a boy or a girl or one of the other 55 genders or b) gearing up to out-genocide Bill Gates.

What I saw, what everyone saw, is that Conservative Inc.’s talking heads are far more interested in trying to score points against liberals than help those who are supposedly on their own side. Not only was it not effective in the least, it was just another example of how offensively useless these would-be opinion leaders are.

UPDATE: This limerick from SocialGalactic is apt.

The GE campaigned with euphoria

Yet losing turned hope to dysphoria

The swamp thralls the sheep

But dug down too deep

And awoke the Gen Z under Moria

Not one cent for their own

While media conservatives are giddy about the chance to financially support their political “opponents”.

Matt Walsh@MattWalshBlog

As you’ve heard, @AOC’s abuela is living in a dilapidated home that was ravaged by Hurricane Maria. AOC is unable to help her own grandma for whatever reason, so I have set up this Go Fund Me campaign to save her home. Please give if you can. #HelpAbuela

Cuckservatives love nothing better than to “surprise” people by materially supporting their enemies. Their primary objective is to be publicly seen as the nice people. As Stalin learned, the Left doesn’t even need to buy the rope with which to hang them, conservatives will literally give it to their would-be executioners for free.

Are you even a little bit surprised to learn that Ben Shapiro is pushing this idiocy too?

UPDATE: For the benefit of those who are apparently too slow to understand that everyone here knows perfectly well what these moronic cucks were intending, we are aware the very clever plan is to OWN THE LIBS and MAKE THE DEMS LOOK LIKE HYPOCRITES! Our criticism is based on the fact that this objective is an unnecessary, pointless, and wasteful bit of grandstanding.